GOP punishment

[wdmso]

It's a "sad day in America" when lawmakers, their staff, and their family members are being threatened for how they choose to vote on legislation, Rep. Fred Upton, who received a threatening voicemail after voting for the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, said Sunday.

Welcome to the new GOP

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

It's a "sad day in America" when lawmakers, their staff, and their family members are being threatened for how they choose to vote on legislation, Rep. Fred Upton, who received a threatening voicemail after voting for the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, said Sunday.

Welcome to the new GOP

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

was it sad when Maxine Waters said on TV that people should confront republicans in public, to let them know they aren't welcome anytime, anywhere?

If this only a republican problem, tell that to Steve Scalise.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

why has the national guard been activated in Wisconsin? because they’re afraid conservatives are going to riot? or afraid
liberals are going to riot?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Rep. Fred Upton, who received a threatening voicemail

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pretty sure this is the first time this has ever happened since phones were invented

what have we become....???

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

why has the national guard been activated in Wisconsin?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

roasting marshmallows for the peaceful protestors...peaceful protestors will provide the campfires

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

why has the national guard been activated in Wisconsin? because they’re afraid conservatives are going to riot? or afraid
liberals are going to riot?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So you think that comment doesn’t apply to them… also

I am happy that I am not a Fan boy !
of 17 year who killed 2 and shot one claiming self defense…

Ps get back to me when these people whom may or may not riot try to overthrow the government .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So you think that comment doesn’t apply to them… also

I am happy that I am not a Fan boy !
of 17 year who killed 2 and shot one claiming self defense…

Ps get back to me when these people whom may or may not riot try to overthrow the government .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

for the 20th time, it was unbelievably stupid for rittenhouse to head there with a rifle.

but that has absolutely no bearing on the trial. because even stupid people are entitled to self defense.

“claiming self defense.”

FFS, one of them pointed a loaded gun at Rittenhouses head from 5 feet away. how is that NOT self defense? the guy who got shot, pointed his gun at rittenhouse, before rittenhouse raised his gun at him. open and shut self defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So you think that comment doesn’t apply to them…
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you said something like “welcome to the new GOP”.

so no, you weren’t talking about BLM rioters.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

for the 20th time, it was unbelievably stupid for rittenhouse to head there with a rifle.

but that has absolutely no bearing on the trial. because even stupid people are entitled to self defense.

“claiming self defense.”

FFS, one of them pointed a loaded gun at Rittenhouses head from 5 feet away. how is that NOT self defense? the guy who got shot, pointed his gun at rittenhouse, before rittenhouse raised his gun at him. open and shut self defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe the guy who was pointing the gun saw an active shooter kill two people, but I guess it all depends on who’s shooting.
I can find plenty of rationalizations for shooting armed people that were seen as threats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Maybe the guy who was pointing the gun saw an active shooter kill two people, but I guess it all depends on who’s shooting.
I can find plenty of rationalizations for shooting armed people that were seen as threats.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Doesn't matter what the guy who was pointing the gun thinks he saw. Rittenhouse still reacted in self defense. Including when he shot the other two that were chasing him and attacking him.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Ps get back to me when these people whom may or may not riot try to overthrow the government .

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, the cell phone brigade was unable to overthrow the government…..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Doesn't matter what the guy who was pointing the gun thinks he saw. Rittenhouse still reacted in self defense. Including when he shot the other two that were chasing him and attacking him.

Pete is frustrated again…
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Thank the GOP and Trump for finally bringing us infrastructure funding desperately needed, oh wait it’s NOT the all talk and no action guys win. Moscow Mitch ready to block everything, until it helps everyone including his constituents and then he is a no show for the signing, partisan hack.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Thank the GOP and Trump for finally bringing us infrastructure funding desperately needed, oh wait it’s NOT the all talk and no action guys win. Moscow Mitch ready to block everything, until it helps everyone including his constituents and then he is a no show for the signing, partisan hack.

the gop gets a huge F for not doing this when they could’ve.

despite your seething hatred, every single poll shows republicans holding huge leads for the midterms, as of now, which is a long way off obviously.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

despite your seething hatred

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he's been pretty cranky hasn't he....

[wdmso]

The Wyoming Republican Party voted on Saturday to no longer recognize Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as a member of their party.

For not bending the knee to Trump… America 1st just another GOP scam

So Joe and Krysten still getting it worse ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The Wyoming Republican Party voted on Saturday to no longer recognize Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as a member of their party.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you can have her if we get Tulsi Gabbard

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

you can have her if we get Tulsi Gabbard

amen to that.

wayne, is the DNC throwing parades for Manchin and Sinema right now? or are they being attacked non-stop? but according to you, that’s ok.

the GOP had a little civil war, it’s over, and the Liz Cheney faction got clobbered.

The democrat civil war is just starting, and man oh man is it entertaining.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

So Joe and Krysten still getting it worse ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

they’re getting smeared non stop by the left. wait until there’s more attention to the social spending bill.

wayne, if the people back hime
feel cheney betrayed them, this is what she deserves. it’s called democracy. you think there’s a rule that you can’t criticize elected officials within your own party?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

The Republicans sure are being mean to Liz Cheney, someone who has the capacity to mount an independent spoiler run for POTUS in 2 years slicing off 5-8% of the R vote in places like PA or even Iowa. I’d donate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The Republicans sure are being mean to Liz Cheney, someone who has the capacity to mount an independent spoiler run for POTUS in 2 years slicing off 5-8% of the R vote in places like PA or even Iowa. I’d donate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

are the democrats being mean to Manchin and Sinema?

what is a party supposed to do, when it feels a member isn’t being loyal?

politics is a contact sport.

Cheney might run as a republican in the primary and get trounced. if she runs as an independent in the general that would increase the odds of a democratic win for sure. unless Kamala is running, in which case every registered republican in the country could run for president, and many would still get more votes than she will.

turns out being black and female, doesn’t necessarily overcome being an unimpressive, unprincipled, stupid, cackling skank.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

are the democrats being mean to Manchin and Sinema?

what is a party supposed to do, when it feels a member isn’t being loyal?

politics is a contact sport.

Cheney might run as a republican in the primary and get trounced. if she runs as an independent in the general that would increase the odds of a democratic win for sure. unless Kamala is running, in which case every registered republican in the country could run for president, and many would still get more votes than she will.

turns out being black and female, doesn’t necessarily overcome being an unimpressive, unprincipled, stupid, cackling skank.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Misogyny much?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Misogyny much?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i don’t think it’s sexist to call a skank a skank.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

feel cheney betrayed them, this is what she deserves. it’s called democracy. you think there’s a rule that you can’t criticize elected officials within your own party?

You have a twisted idea of Democracy…. Betrayed ! Lol. Can you say Radicalized
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

feel cheney betrayed them, this is what she deserves. it’s called democracy. you think there’s a rule that you can’t criticize elected officials within your own party?

You have a twisted idea of Democracy…. Betrayed ! Lol. Can you say Radicalized
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

they feel she betrayed them. it’s their opinion wayne, just as you have many opinions that a lot of people think are, well, not flawless.

my idea of democracy, is that people
who voted for liz cheney are allowed to criticize her if they feel betrayed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there’s a big difference between failing to exhibit fealty, and voting to impeach. you have your opinion. her constituents have theirs. If the GOP stayed in its 2010 course, Liz might have been destined for big things. The GOP is different now, less tolerance for republicans of her mold.

[Pete F.]

Pretty simple, if you don’t exhibit fealty to Trump they’ll attempt to throw you out of the party.
Because Trump is the party and it is party first, country second
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Pretty simple, if you don’t exhibit fealty to Trump they’ll attempt to throw you out of the party.
Because Trump is the party and it is party first, country second
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There is a land mass named the United States. When some people pledge allegiance to it, they have a vision of what it is, what their "country" is. What it is supposed to be according to whatever vision they've been taught, or have conjured on their own.

As individuals become members of groups and are cajoled into political parties, they either choose the party that seems to most closely align with the personal vision they experientially have grown into, or they simply inherit the party of their parents or of whatever societal tribe they belong to.

But the party they choose or inherit does not have the same vision of what the "country" is as does the other party (or parties). In the beginning, the vision of "our country" was pretty much, or at least fundamentally, the same for the two major parties. That original vision was informed by the Constitution the founders created.

As time passed with new generations of citizens with continuously changing visions of what the "country" is, or is supposed to be, the gap in vision between parties grew. Till today, the visions have become fundamentally opposed.

One party seems to prefer that we do not publicly make a formal pledge of allegiance to it, as that would offend some sensibilities. For that party, fealty to "country" verges on jingoistic nationalism. It supports kneeling in protest to what the flag represents. The borders separating our "country" from the rest of the world are more of an impediment than a protection. And for that party, the original uniting vision of what the country is politically, has also become an impediment. That binding, unifying document, must continually be evaded, overcome, while giving lip service to it with novel, contradictive interpretations. Rather, that party verges toward formal, legal, union with the rest of the world. Toward worldwide treaties that can bind us to world opinion and governance, and can be strong enough to supercede the limitations of the outdated U.S. constitution. That's all well and good if it's to your liking.

But it differs in so many ways from the vision of the "country" that the other party has which include opposition on things like our borders, the meaning of our Constitution, our view of exceptionalism, individual and religious liberty, right to bear arms, size and scope of government, marriage, life . . . even to the most fundamental division on what constitutes a man or a woman.

We live in the same land mass, but not in the same "country." The words country and nation are colloquially used interchangeably. But they have a formal distinct meaning. "Country" being a land mass, and "nation" being the political, social, cultural, etc., union. I put that word in quotes because expressions like "country first" usually are not merely referring to a land mass, but to a "nation." The intended meaning would more correctly be "nation first." We all live in the same defined land mass. But when we say "country first" we don't mean "land mass first."

On the other hand, maybe "country first" is appropriate to Progressives' vision of government. They have more affinity to the world, the global land mass, than merely being restricted to the U.S. "nation" which is too antiquated, provincial, and unfair according to their view of it..

Anyway, Trump is not the party. Hopefully, the party learned some important things from Trump--gained some political wisdom and know how that can appeal to Americans who are becoming aware of the stealth of this nation that progressivism has been covertly perpetrating for a century and is now more boldly and openly foisting on us. Politically, Trump is definitely "nation first." And that notion is horrific to Progressives. Understandably so. The Progressive doctrine is progressively morphing from its vision of administrated state power over this nation into the larger collective of administration over the Western world--and over the world eventually. And, of course, by experts who'll make it all good.

[Pete F.]

Liz Cheney is a conservative Republican in every traditional respect. But she will not lie for Trump -- which is why she's persona non grata in the GOP. "The Republican Party is more than Trump!" some people say, with annoyance. Oh? Not by the evidence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Liz Cheney is a conservative Republican in every traditional respect. But she will not lie for Trump -- which is why she's persona non grata in the GOP. "The Republican Party is more than Trump!" some people say, with annoyance. Oh? Not by the evidence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

she’s a conservative in the bush/cheney neocon tradition. they have become less popular.

you can’t say everyone in the gop is either a cheney backer or a trumplican.

i like trump’s policies for the most part, i am disgusted by his personal behavior. that’s where much of the gop is right now. we want someone who will govern much like trump did ( again, whether you like it or not, his policies worked and were popular), without the loathsome behavior.

We want Trump without the spoiled brat 8 year old. that looks a lot
like Desantis to me. It also looks a lot like Desantis to many on the left, which is why they are terrified of him.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

she’s a conservative in the bush/cheney neocon tradition. they have become less popular.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

leftists hated bush/cheney but they suddenly love Liz...funny how that works